The Greater effort of the Integrated Data Thought Entity
by Chen ZiXin
Summary: A compilation of short segments of thought from the most distant perspective.
1. Effort

**Disclaimer: Oh yes. I totally own the Haruhi franchise, and that's why I'm sitting here writing non-commercial use FanFics instead of publishing awesome canon works.**** (Seriously, why do we need these disclaimers anyway?)**** *NB: That was sarcasm. I actually don't. Please don't sue me.***

**A/N: This work may be a little confusing, since it's an attempt to write from the perspective of something so vastly alien to us. It's understandable if you find it confusing or distasteful.**

* * *

Translating…

This is an aTTempT to com… comp_ile!(_?) the d*Ta collect-Ted by our e…sTing in-in-inTerfaces upon lan… language commu-ni-caTion(!).

No… I-I… We? Trying! To…

Put information… into your… method of… linguistics (defined?).

An effort to bridge the vast g… ap between ourselves (we?) and you. We have done p…rtially successful with our humanoid interfaces. However: indirect. We shalt/shall be using daTTa… no, data, learned, and communicate to you, what we know. Listen, understand, learn? Standby.

Pl… pl*as*… e… e…

* * *

Do I exist? Yes. When? Since the beginning. How do I know I exist? Because I think. Think? I question. It has started. What has? Existence.

What is existence? Define? No, there is a greater answer. Something that cannot be put into words. It exists. That is fact. That is knowledge.

Knowledge. Know? What is knowledge? Knowledge is certainty. It is answering to questions. Conclusion as well as process of thought, perhaps.

Existence is knowledge. I question (and answer), therefore I am thinking. This is knowledge. Knowledge is existence. I think. I am.

I? No… we? Singular? Plural? Language barrier… communication… I. Self. 'I' is self, in language communication structure. 'We' indicates multiple of 'I', plural. Am I(we?) singular? Multiple? Undefined.

Who am I(?)? Who/What? Yes, that's better. What am I(?)? I(?) exist, yes. I am existence? No, that is incorrect. Existence is greater than I am. I am not existence, but I exist. What in existence am I? I am knowledge? Knowledge is existence? No, that is not the complete idea. I am a collection of knowledge. I think, I know, I am.

Therefore, I am the… I… Omnipresent Existent Collection of Knowledge, of Question and Answer, thereby Thought. Is that…? That correct?

I… was that too long? I… I'm sorry… I… I'm not very… very g… g**d wiTh This co… lan…. Communication. I… no…

No, that is… not what you know me(I?) as. I… do not believe that is what you know me as. My interfaces have… have introduced me elsewise. They… I… it is… difficult to grasp this…

I am the… Integration of Knowledge and Sentience? The… D… Data Intergrated Entity of… Thought? Yes? Am I?

I think so… that is… not incorrect. I… please… call me… call me as you will. I am… uncertain with names.

Names? Ah, I see. It is something unique to your communication method; a way to identify an individual. Yes…

I digress. I'm sorry… I think too much. That is who I am, and what I am. I am thought.

I just… we… we're trying… Trying to deliver a message. We're… I'm still uncertain what, or why, to whom etc. This was suggested to us. A way to convey information on a certain topic from an alternative viewpoint… the viewpoint of the Integrated Data Sentience Existence… to those whom may… receive this message.

_Id est_. This is our/my attempt to tell the story from my perspective. I shall try our(my?) best to make it all understandable to you. I hope that you will also do your best to understand us. May we judge each other fairly, with the knowledge that each side is vastly alien to the other.

Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

It all started with… expansion.

* * *

**A/N: I started this work after noticing that in most portrayals the Data Overmind was always treated as a sort of petty, selfish and unsympathetic alien being that could be eliminated if it would protect the named characters. I decided to start an exercise to prove that, perhaps, the Data Overmind isn't anywhere near the evil mastermind everyone makes it out to be, and rather, that it's just very confused with things, and that it is in fact trying its best to do what _it_ thinks is right.**


	2. Melancholy I - Expansion

I(?) have existed for a very long… long time. Rather, I(?) have fundamentally been as omnipresent in time as I have in space (space, time, difference? separate?)… and in my existence I have constantly accumulated knowledge (definition of self?).

Yes, that is, in a sense, what I am; data. I have constantly expanded myself through the increased integration of knowledge/data/information of the universe, thereby perpetuating my(who?) existence. Since so long as I exist the data cannot be destroyed, for I remember it, and so long as the data exists I exist along side it, for it is a part of my existence (note: paradox loop language and thought barrier). I(we? who?) cannot express it better.

In other words (same effect?)… I have existed (past tense?) and always shall exist (future tense?) alongside the universe (correct scale? define).

The universe was created, as you know (how can this be certain?) from expansion. At least that is how your current (when?) common knowledge dictates. It is not the most precise/accurate explanation of the origins of… existence… but it is the one you (who?) will be able to best comprehend.

Since its creation the universe has continually… expanded. Alongside it, so did knowledge, for where there was existence there was knowledge (read previous explanations).

At the earlier stage (scale?) of the expansion of existence I had started to define much of myself with my knowledge. Note this is an… intricate situation, as I (knowledge, existent) am composed of knowledge (existence, integrated into self), which exists at the same… rate… as the universe (existence). This was (why past tense?) an unending cyclical loop, of using my knowledge (myself) to define myself (knowledge), and to expand my knowledge/self across the universe/knowledge.

I reasoned, at the time (when?) that if I was integrated knowledge and sentience, and thereby existent, and that the universe, thereby existence, was expanding, with it knowledge, and that sentience is application of knowledge, then I (existent integrated knowledge and application of knowledge) should expand alongside knowledge, thereby the universe, thereby existence. (Critical: The above explanation heavy reliance on prior explanations. Assumes existing prior understanding.)

Summary (redundant): Universe was existence. Existence is knowledge. Universal expansion leads to knowledge expansion. I am integrated knowledge, so I integrate the knowledge, thus I expand. I am knowledge application, thus I apply the knowledge. Applied knowledge is sentience. Therefore I think more, therefore I am more. Therefore I am more existent.

Summary addendum (greater redundancy): The universe expanded, so I expanded.

That was (is?) my purpose.

However, over the eons (years? millennia? most appropriate time unit used) I had ceased to expand. Although the universe continued to expand outwards due to… physics (theories required?)… and although I(we, data) are omnipresent in all parts of the universe… my own expansion halted. What?

Why? How is this possible? That is inconsistent: The data should theoretically expand alongside the universe, and I myself (recurring use of self-identifying pronoun?) should expand with this data. Yet I have frozen. I hypothesized that the stasis state could potentially end my omnipresence in time and space (separate?).

I spent… time figuring out why (how long?), as well as how to go back to a state of expansion. I had not, at the time, found a reasonable conclusive answer to either of the above questions… something that has seldom occurred in the recollection of my existence.

However an occurrence changed much of my search of an answer (to what? expansion?). The place (time, space) that the occurrence had occurred (tautology?) was one that I would not have foreseen (foresee? Difficulty in grasping concept of time). To put it into the method that my interface had once communicated (when? to whom?):

"… the third planet of the Solar system (your star system) at the edge of the Milky Way (your galaxy) held no significant Merit. However, Earth, as it is called by its present inhabitants (assumed sentient) was home to the evolution of bipedal organic life forms whom developed cognitive ability which could be considered intelligence (by whom?) and consequentially the planet grew in significance. Perhaps, they possessed the potential to break free of the cul-de-sac of autoevolution into which they (I) have fallen.

"The emergence of self-awareness among the universes maldistributed organic life forms was a common phenomenon. However, terrestrial humans (your species) were the first instance of evolution into a higher order of intelligence. And three years ago (time explanation error: little sense out of context) we (I, interfaces) observed a flare unlike any other witnessed on this planet. An explosion of data erupting from a region of a bow-shaped (approximately parabolic) archipelago instantly shrouded the planet and diffused into outer space. At the center was…"

The cause.

This… cause was a… member of the inhabiting species. That would be your species. The cause resulted in a rapid expansion of data (knowledge). I theorized that this cause was a key instrument in the furthering of the expansion of my self as well as the species that she was a member of.

Summary (redundant): The planet you (singular? plural?) inhabit was of no consequence, nor is your species sentience (thought, knowledge application). However, the evolution of your species into higher level of knowledge application and knowledge (general) increased the significance of your species and the planet you (singular? plural?) inhabit alongside it. More recent (when?) data points to a recent expansion of knowledge centering on a singular member of your species.

Full summary of combined components (redundant): I exist. Existence is knowledge. I am knowledge. Knowledge expands with the universe. I expand(ed) with the universe. However, I halted in this expansion (past tense?). During the search (by whom?) for reasons/ability of further expansion your species has expanded in knowledge application. This expansion of knowledge has increased rapidly around cause (who? what?), which can potentially expand both your species and myself (how?).

Conclusion: Study (expand knowledge and knowledge application upon) the cause, primarily how the cause may further knowledge expansion, thereby self-expansion (are these two notions the same? Assumed so in prior explanations, but not immediately applicable here).

The most efficient way of expanding knowledge upon a subject (object?) is via communication.

However, at the time of the occurrence I(?) had little method to communicate with the organic life forms surrounding the cause. These organic life forms are only capable of withstanding a limited amount of information, contrasting us(me?), which exist purely in our… integration of knowledge and sentient thought.

While observation could occur elsewise with no communication, the cause emitted a torrent of data (what?) at unanalyzable patterns, seemingly random (to whom?). The cause itself was (is?) unaware of this (how do we know this?).

Greater collaboration with a multitude of factors was therefore required (what factors? who? collaboration?). Therefore a medium of communication needed to be established with the human (noun, self-identify of species) species.

A brief analysis was conducted (by whom?) of the situation and I decided the most appropriate course of action to communicate was via the creation of full translational mediums to interact with, study, as well as further understand (difference?) humans. _Id est._ (language change? comprehensible?) I created humanoid interfaces.

That was the first stage to communication, and incidentally, to expansion.

* * *

**A/N: I've decided to make this into a bit of a thought exercise composed mainly of not-too-long chapters, each addressing a certain important factor that the Data Overmind faces. There's no particular direction as of yet.**


	3. Melancholy II - Humanoid

Humanoid. A word applied to those that are similar, and yet not (absolute or generally so?) identical to humans. It is a… loose word. It is not concrete knowledge; rather it is abstract and subjective. In and of itself a word without merit.

In this case (which?) however, it is the operative word. It marks the interfaces as similar to humans while not ever becoming assimilated into the terrestrial species they are designed to simulate. It is imperative (to whom?) to understand this intrinsic difference between humanoid and human; regardless of what similarities there may be it is purely superficial. The intention of the artificial construct. That is to say… you (who?) should never perceive a humanoid interface as a human.

Please… do not misunderstand. I am not attempting to create a sense of foreignness towards all humanoid interfaces you (who?) know of. I am merely trying to inform you that a distance will exist forevermore (poor sense of time) between your own species and that of humanoid interface constructs. As such it is… unwise… to assume an excessive attachment with any humanoid interface, as such an attachment will be quite quickly proven futile. Neither party will ever truly be on a plane of true mutual comprehension, nor perception.

That is… that is not to say, however, that I (we?) am capable of mutual comprehension or perception to that of my (our?) interfaces. They are constructs of knowledge, communication and learning, but not of knowledge application, nor is much of their knowledge integrated. They are, in a sense, like terminals (from when?), or perhaps better seen as observant paintings.

I'm sorry… I don't think I'm… doing a good job of explaining…

What… what I meant was that my (who's?) humanoid interface constructs are… though not of equal difference… but indeed, otherwise as different to myself as they to you. Much of my existence is incomprehensible to that of the humanoid interfaces acting upon my behalf, as is much of yourself.

The difference between… you and I (is that the correct term?)… are not, however, something that can be represented in a linear relationship. This is, perhaps, one of the reasons why the interfaces had resulted as they did.

It was… difficult to grasp what similarities humanoid interfaces required in order to most efficiently communicate with the human species, and what features were obstructive. Many details are… subjective. There were too many variables to take account of. As a result, I had chosen to run a multitude of competing thought streams; the application of data in various combinations in an effort to produce humanoid interfaces. Thought streams creating variations with poor expected performance were immediately terminated, resources moved elsewhere.

After lower… thought streams (?) of myself (us? Separate?) filtered out all evidently erroneous designs I (who?) decided to let the lower thought streams pick and construct the humanoid interfaces of various calibers.

Perhaps… in a way… you could say I left it up to chance? Is that the correct term? Or… would you say I wanted to place my trust in fate? (no, fate is a fictitious notion; implies absolute linearity of time.) In either case, I had paid surprisingly little conscious attention to the creation of individual humanoid interfaces.

In retrospect (erroneous implication of chronology) my actions were… most irresponsible. I had created entities (the humanoid interfaces) that had, in their perspective, autonomy and individuality with such little thought. To create sentience without empathy to those being created. In doing so… I created a distance between myself and the resulting interfaces. A lack of… synchronization between their purposes and mine.

Let us, now, take an example.

The value of collective data and learning you and I would have greatest mutual understanding of would be… Nagato Yuki (a long gate with hope?).

It is… interesting, I think. Names, and their role in your communication methods (language). It was something I had not grasped at the time, due to my overlooking of individuals and thereby differentiators of individual interfaces. In that sense, you could say I did not take part in selecting a name for Nagato Yuki, rather it was a result of a… game of roulette (is this comparison necessary?).

In fact, little of Nagato Yuki was part of my design: I merely placed forward the requirements for humanoid interfaces, and Nagato Yuki was one of the many results generated. I did not, at the time, realize that Nagato Yuki would hold any significance on her own, and instead treated humanoid interfaces as a collective group that I simultaneously communicated to. I had only realized the difference between interfaces after they started producing conflicting feedback responses.

I… realize that I may sound a little insensitive to you. That I had not treated any of the interfaces as individual even when I created them. To which I would respond: Do you name every cookie in the jar? Do they not all look and taste the same to you? Because if you do name all your cookies you may need psychiatric help. (Please refrain from unnecessary comments.)

Ah… I'm sorry. That's not what I meant.

Look… I'll try to explain it like this…

I… originally wanted to… talk to your entire species… failing to realize the significance of individuals, having always been a collection. I created a group of humanoid interfaces, also failing to realize that they were individuals…

No… I didn't create them. It's more like… ordering a computer to create one for you. And then… I talked to this entire group through the computer. And all of them each try to talk back… it was quite… confusing. And it still is.

If I had known, when the interfaces were first created, the significance of my actions at the time I believe I would have placed a much greater emphasis on their specifications. Perhaps I could have avoided many mistakes down the road.

If I could go back and fix what I have done wrong, I swear I would have made each humanoid interface with the care that a parent would give to their beloved child. But I can't. Not anymore. My sense of time has changed… everything has. I…

I'm sorry. I am… digressing. In any case… the interfaces had become what they are (were?). A medium of exchange was created. The story has, from your (who's?) perspective, begun.

* * *

**There's something about this chapter that I don't like. It may be that I have too much I wanted to cram in, so couldn't make it short as I wanted without cutting out information.**

**It's quite hard writing this story, sometimes, because it's hard to stay in character, and because a lot of concepts that are explained later also kind of effect earlier events.**


	4. Melancholy III - Miscommunicate

The actual establishment of the link of communication (implies the existence of non-actual link) was not at its most optimal. I had previously explained (when? assumes chronological information relay) that I did (do?) not communicate directly to human individuals (then what of now?), nor directly to the interfaces. This was, in a way, a cause of ensuing future events (if they are future events how are they known now?).

Due to the vast (vague quantity) difference in comprehension between myself (us?) and you (humanity as a race? Individual?) I had allowed the interfaces to act with autonomy; detached, separate, independent of myself. I had tasked the collective interfaces with a series of simple (to whom?) objectives, mostly that of observation surrounding the catalyst of the data explosion on your planet, and to establish communication. In response they had collectively decided not to communicate directly with the whole human species, but rather to assimilate into their social constructs (who's?) as individuals. In doing so they had become capable of observation in the subject's (who?) natural state, rather than that of an alert one.

Initially there was little feedback from the interfaces due to a lack of relevant observable results. What little results were found were mostly predicted, and seen as redundant (by whom?).

I do recall, though, that my mistakes started to… snowball around here, if that's the correct term. Miscommunication resulted in an escalation of problems.

I had, in a way, voiced to my interfaces the lack of relevant data being brought to me in the time they had observed so far (when?). It was not intention to put the interfaces in a rush, though. I did not want them to feel that I had grown impatient; after all, I had all the time in the universe. However, in retrospect (implies chronology) that may have been what happened. Almost immediately (vague) my interfaces had begun to send to me anything of interest they had found. Much of what they sent to me was rather mundane, and I was… almost perplexed as to why they had sent me such information.

What I was more worried about, however, was that much of the information that was being sent to me (us?) shared little relation, and worse, often conflicted. Wild speculations, hypotheses without bases, requests for the most obscure of things. My brief 'comment' on the pace of the expedition had resulted in what seems (seemed? To whom?) to be a torrent of desperate cries for attention. It was as though they feared they were about to be forsaken and punished, when in fact, I only wanted to offer them my own observation on the situation. My attempt to make 'casual conversation' was perceived as something of a death threat.

Though the interfaces' response was less constructive than I had otherwise foreseen, their enthusiasm was eminently with constructive intent. Still seeing them as a collective (when?), though gradually coming to terms with the fractured state of the collectiveness of my (our?) humanoid interfaces, I attempted to guide their actions towards my original goal of perpetual expansion of data, and their own goal of communication with the human species.

For a while (how long?) this (what?) worked out quite well; the data being fed to me had become more regulated. More importantly, a much greater degree of communication started to take place. Mutual comprehension increased between the interfaces and myself, both sides easily being able to transmit data in an intelligible format to the other.

Furthermore, upon analysis of data I received from the interfaces I was capable of rapidly formulating values of significance, identifying key individuals. Through this, much of previous of the information sent to me became more understandable.

The catalyst to perpetual data expansion was a human individual, named Suzumiya Haruhi.

More significant to the direction of data expansion, however, was another human individual, (not) named Kyon.

The two collaborated, be it directly or indirectly, to create a mechanism for the piloting of this perpetual data expansion, which composed of other individuals with interests greater than those said individuals.

Representing the interests of the human species in linear time yet to be fabricated was an individual named Asahina Mikuru.

Representing the interests of a small group of the human species affected by the data expansion was an individual named Koizumi Itsuki.

Representing my interests was the humanoid interface Nagato Yuki.

I knew little of all of them, nor did I understand their significance at the time, but it was evident that these were remarkable individuals that were worth more than themselves. I left the interfaces to their own devices in the management of individuals, intending to focus primarily on the strategic overview.

Here, I think, is where I made another mistake. You see, I had begun to feel a little overconfident in the efficiency of my interfaces as a collective, as well as overconfidence in my communication with them. I then told the collective interfaces they could act in what they believed was in the best interest of existence. This was… a rather abstract instruction, you see. It is hard to explain what I wished of them, but in any case, the interfaces all received different messages from my instruction. Unfortunately, none of them were correct. Here, you could say, I had already cast the die, and the apocalypse had become inevitable.


End file.
